[NT] Keirsey's book proves NT's are Choleric, not Phlegmatic

[tinkerbell]

Sorry but Please understand me II actualyl states that Rationalist are phelgamtic on page 26 - in the historic table of evolment of the categories.

Teh tempraments, as used by teh ancients and galen, relate to the tempraments as used in astrology (they only seperated somewhere mid 1800's - eve of 1900's). They aslo relate to diurinal astrology which uses cold and hot her. I'm not expert but these relatings do make sense

Sanguine = air temprament,
Melancolic = Earth
Coleric = fire
Phelgmatic = water - cold and wet


Air relates to light concept type thinking, and performing and showing off - often thinking in the untangible

Earth = heavey plodding types, stable plodders if you like, like resources and traditions

Fire = ralleying the cause (the 1960's had a glut of planets in Leo hence all the campaigning - womens rights and Veitnam, nuclear disarmemebr etc), Idealist as a name suits them better. In MBTI they are the Emo group but that is a relatively new spin, however if you take and NF they are deeply emo

Phlegmatics; are water, cold and deep. Astrologicaly this is the emotional group, however their thinking is usually broader and more considered and on a surface level less emotional than the NF's. They make decisions at a rather heavier level.

I'm not giving a really great profile of the tempraments from the astro perspective but I cna assure you they fit properly with where Keisey got to with them

http://www.personality-project.org/others/heineman/galen.htm

 

[Eric B]

Yes, PUMII says that Rationals are Phlegmatic.
But then when he compares it to the elements (I forget where, but Berens lists it on p.2 of her temperament book) everything gets mixed up.
They have:

(NF) Choleric = water
(SJ) Melancholic = earth
(NT) Phlegmatic = air
(SP) Sanguine = fire

Only Melancholic is right.
Choleric as water? Phlegmatic=air? You would have thought he would have just gone on and associated the NF with fire for the kind of reason you gave, but I guess he couldn't bring himself to it. They are still ultimately too "friendly" and people-focused. (Likewise, Sanguine as fire might seem to fit, but then they are too friendly and people focused as well. "Fire" is hot and wet, and "dryness" basically is task-focus. Sanguine simply shares the "hotness" which is the expressiveness).

The fact that he has NF=water is another great evidence that it should be Phlegmatic (cold & wet).

 

[Jaguar]

Choleric: This is the commander-type. Cholerics are dominant, strong, decisive, stubborn and even arrogant.

Melancholy: This is the mental-type. Their typical behaviour involves thinking, assessing, making lists, evaluating the positives and negatives, and general analysis of facts.

Sanguine: This is the social-type. They enjoy fun, socialising, chatting, telling stories - and are fond of promising the world, because that's the friendly thing to do.

Phlegmatic: This is the flat-type. They are easy going, laid back, nonchalant, unexcitable and relaxed. Desiring a peaceful environment above all else.

NT Rationals are easy-going, laid-back, and desire a peaceful environment above all else? When will they hold hands and begin chanting: Kumbaya, my Lord? Thinking NT rationals belong in the Phlegmatic group is a bit silly. Furthermore, people are a blend of all the types. Not just one. Those blends will vary, of course, depending on your most recent test, which can easily change depending on how you happen to resonate with the questions or the test fomat. The last test I took had me at a near-equal blend of Chol/Sang/Mel. Phlegmatic is always my lowest score. (Probably because there is nothing "easy going" or "laid back" about me. ) But then I could take another test on a different website and get anything from Chol/Sang, Sang/Chol, Chol/Mel and even one site I scored near-equal on all four.

The most misleading websites of all are those whose method isn't set up to show the scores in all 4, and mislead people into thinking they are only a single type or double, when they are better described as a triple. Bottom line is, it's a crapshoot.

When the results can vary so much, what is the point of it all? Galen Temps don't really impress me, and never have. One thing that does need to change is people thinking they are only one of the 4 types. That's as ridiculous as thinking someone is only one of 4 DiSC types.

People are blends.

 

[Eric B]

Well, the APS divides the different temperaments according to the three areas fof interaction (social, leadership, deep relationships), so a person can be a blend of three (and even four, if one or more of the temperaments is a "Phlegmatic blend" meaning it is a moderate version of the other four). Yet a person can be the same temperament in all three. Still, you end up with 125 basic combinations instead of just 16, so you do have finer distinctiosns between personality types.

Similar to our function preference, temperament could be described as a preference. So everyone can behave in the defining ways (expressive, reserved, focus on people or tasks), but they will still have a natural preference for certain temperaments in certain areas which will determine the temperament they "wear", so listing the unpreferred ones is almost moot.

 

[Caesar]

The way I see it,

SJ=Earth
SP=Fire
NF=Water
NT=Air

But I'm not sure how that correlates with the four temperaments of Galen... or IF they even correlate.

I've been typed as Melacholic-Choleric, and I find it pretty accurate.

Conversely, I might see it as:

IJ: Melancholic (Water)
IP: Phlegmatic (Air)
EJ: Choleric (Fire)
EP: Sanguine (Earth)

 

[tinkerbell]

OK I know the tempraments from astrology more than anything, it is passed through generations via astrology more specifically Horary astrology (not a branch I particularly like/have confidence in).

From a book Christian astrology by William Lilly dated c.1649 taken from transcripts from the original work in the British national library:
Choleric = Fire
Sanguine = Aire
Melancoly = Eather
Phelgmatic = Water

I suspect folks get mixed up in the last centrury (20th centrury I mean), that the astrological/ancient definition is crossed. In psycology they mix up humanitarian with emotional.

The Sign Leo (choleric), of the late 50's an 1960's saw the big hitters of the zodiac, hence there was massive steps in humanitarian issues: Campainging for equality, rights, against nuclear issues etc etc.

SP - is good for air, which is ultimately a party element - flast moving light an airy, I have a make who is ladened with air - has to make effort to do practical things, but is great on the light media.creative idea's type.

Emo in astrology is deeper than it appears in psycology profling, it's not about the humanitarian NF type things, it's the emotional thing. I ran a survey on this site a while back looking at how romantic NT's are - they will only stay in relationships with people they intend to keep around - ie it's not a relationship just for the sake of it. NFs however don't like to be along - very choleric.

There is loads of traditional astrology sites that can give you more details of the astrological use of humours. look within the category of horaray, you may find it strips back some of the issues of badly applied information that has been lost due to poor scholarly efforts.

It often happens in astrology that one person chooses to dumb down and ancient text and can cause a decade of confusion until someone else figures out they translated something badly.

I do also appreciate that you may think that olde world astrology has buggar all to do with temprement type, but ultimately astrology was combined with medicine and other sciences until fairly recently

 

[tinkerbell]

will post up some of the links which may give a starter on why the tempraments are the way they are with the elements, and almost everyone is mixed some more so than others
http://www.mediaspotlight.org/pdfs/FOUR TEMPERAMENTS.PDF
http://www.astroamerica.com/medieval.html

If I dig up something more relevent I will post the link

 

[Eric B]

The way I see it,

SJ=Earth
SP=Fire
NF=Water
NT=Air

But I'm not sure how that correlates with the four temperaments of Galen... or IF they even correlate.

SP is the "airy" one. It conveys a sense of "lightness". Fire might be light as well, but then the descriptions I gave from the book of the NT shows that it is ultimately the "fiery" one, and as for the so-called "calmness", that would be the fire's dryness.
I don't buy the whole "thinking=air" association mentioned earlier, and I may have seen somewhere else. That does not seem to go according to the original concept.

I've been typed as Melacholic-Choleric, and I find it pretty accurate.

Conversely, I might see it as:

IJ: Melancholic (Water)
IP: Phlegmatic (Air)
EJ: Choleric (Fire)
EP: Sanguine (Earth)

One of the biggest, most consistent evidences for what I've been saying is the fact that INTJ's here have almost unanimously come out as Melancholy-Choleric. According to Keirsey, they should be Melancholic-Phlegmatic (INJ="Melancholic" or "Contender": it's only IJ for N's, and is instead IT for S's; NT=Phlegmatic)

OK I know the tempraments from astrology more than anything, it is passed through generations via astrology more specifically Horary astrology (not a branch I particularly like/have confidence in).

From a book Christian astrology by William Lilly dated c.1649 taken from transcripts from the original work in the British national library:
Choleric = Fire
Sanguine = Aire
Melancoly = Eather
Phelgmatic = Water

Melancholy as aether? Did you mean earth (which is almost an anagram for it, which I never even realized until now?)
Aether was supposed to be the fifth element, which was unknown. This would actually fit Supine, which was the one that went unrecognized for all those centuries until the 80's. (And is still largely unknown).

 

[tinkerbell]

Eric yes I meant Earth - my dyslexia/Net typing seems to have my fingers typing words my brain isn't saying.

Old school astrology uses humours a lot, as did old school medicine (Nicholas Culpepper -?sp) is a 17th century herbalist in the UK who developed herbal treaments for different tempraments/imbalances etc as well as other remidies. He was considered a rogue phsiscian because he treated the poor in a time when medicine was trying to become respectable.

There is no confusion in astrology about which elements match up to which humours, it is not something that is disputed at all, so this thread is quite funny from my perspective to see folk debating the different humours relating to psycology which is ultimately a bastardisation of a variety of more ancient thinking.

John Frawley is considered on of the UK leading experts on old school astrology - horary, although I beleive he does other stuff. I own several of his books and I'm pretty sure he covers of humours as they are called.

Project hindsight is still translating very old astrology text from a variety of langauges.

The troublesome bit for people is that NT's are non emotional but that is not how water is used astrologically, think more the deep depths of the ocean, calm, or the calm before the storm, water signs have a head to ride out storms the dominant sign being scorpio, deep misterious, secrative. Do wter signs rationalist - well the seek to understand motivations which is rational to an extent.

From my perspective the humours relationship to elements is not really under any questions, however how MBTI fits with is always a bit cross wise. I tested a freind of mine who is a Leo - strong fire chart, came out very NF. I am half melancoly half Phlegmatic - the mix seems to be more rational than most.

 

[Eric B]

But I don't think any of them said NT was water. That's what you would think Keirsey would have said, to be consistent with it being Phlegmatic.

Though I don't believe in the astrological part of it (Which would appear to suggest that people of a particular sign will lean towards the associated temperament through the assigned element, and it would then be based on when they were born). So I wouldn't make much of that part of it.
They didn't know what to base it on back then. So they basically made it mythological. With our current knowledge now, we can say it is the more logical neurological area. (Hence, I put together this idea: http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...cs/36880-types-neurological-binary-codes.html)

Also, to add:

http://www.mediaspotlight.org/pdfs/FOUR TEMPERAMENTS.PDF

Another apparently "old-line fundamentalist" anti-psychology site... (and apparently one that leans towards Calvinism, at least in the way they use some scriptures). Though I would agree that LaHaye has tried too hard to wed temperament theory to scriptural teaching, and distorted scripture a bit in doing so. And using temperaments to assign people to different ministries. And he also did not go into the structure of the theory, such as the temperament factors, beyond just mentioning introversion and extroversion, and mixes correlations up, such as on his chart of "The Four Behavior-style Theories" he gets the Phlegmatic and Melancholy backwards on "responsiveness", LIFO and DISC. He in passing associates Feelers with Sanguines, Intuitors with Melancholies, Thinkers with Phlegmatics (So he agrees with Keirsey on that), and Sensors with Choleric. That's his only mention of the four dichotomies of Jung (Who he otherwise seems to avoid), but the four dichotomies are not temperaments and never intended to be (even though they figure in them).
As the article says, he provides no basis for a lot of it.

To me, temperament theory is an abstract categorization that we can use to be aware of other people's different perspectives, and how they play out in behavior. This is one of my answers to these anti-psychology ministries, who insist it is indelibly pagan an un-Christian, and too "man-centered".

What was very striking to me was in another article, where they compare the US Constitution to the Bible, and claim that Romans 9:18-25 teaches that all men are not created equally! (It's a passage, as it is, widely misused by Calvinists to teach that all who are "lost" were predestined to that state, and this group is now tying "equality" as people (which the constitution was addressing) to it!

 

[tinkerbell]

Hi Eric,

astrology has been dumbed down for the masses, traditional astrology as would be used by the type of astrologer actively using humours/temprament type would take a similar approach as follows:

Ascendant sign
Moon sign
Sun sign
Planetary signs (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn)
possibly something calle dhte hyleg.

Each of the above would be scored vis a vis their weight for that individual chart, scoring is also based on planetary location in relation to the Sun and diurinal and nocternal strenght of each of the planets.

In modern astrology I am 45:45 Water: Earth, with a 5% fire and no air.
Using the traditional approach I have stronger melancoly and secondary Plegmatic.

Humours to Temprament types is well documented, used in ancient medicine dating back to galens day, as with the Elements - all three things align.

As for what modern spin is used by psycologists trying to reinvenet galens methods and retrofit/fudge around their own questionable application of learning, that is a different animal. Jung applied some of the astrological learning directly and sometimes badly.

From an astrological perspective there are 3 or 4 methods of bucketing people used:
Quadruplicity
Triplicities (being the elements - most relate to humours/temprment types)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triplicity
Fire - Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius - hot, dry; ardent
Earth - Taurus, Virgo, and Capricorn - cold, dry; heavy
Air - Gemini, Libra, and Aquarius - hot, wet; light
Water - Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces - cold, wet; soft


Quadruplcity is a different cateogorisiation indicating the impact of signs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_sign

Cardinal - starters/initiators
Fixed - stablisers/determined, persistant
Mutible - flexible servicing

Interesting that Mutible dominant people were considered not so good in ancient times - as in fickle, inconstant, where as now being flexible is considered a good thing. I don't know the psycological profiling tool but Quads look very like the whole Starter/Initiator and completer finishers etc etc. So again reinventing what was used for many centuries.


When you start overlaying quaruplicies and triplicities togehter you get an all together more complex picture.

The longer in the tooth I get the more I think that modern thinking is simply rebranding of something ancient, but then I have a typical NT love of pulling out history and respinning

As for the jump between temprament and MBTI - I fear the reason there is so many questions is because of a double whammy in bad articulating/dumbign down. In astrology water has been dumbed down to emotions, and that is not true, it is much deeper, it has a stronger reasonance with Intuition than it does with emotion. All people have emotions they are just expressed differently, hence MBTI/PUII giving emo to one specific group seems dumbing down the whole subject of emo.

My point is that I can see from astrology that Choleric/Fire really does related well to NF's desire to champaing and soap box for specific things. It maes sence. And NT's being water born creaters also makes sense however that ones is a lot more difficult to articulate.

 

[Eric B]

There was a bed and breakfast we used to stay at in summer vacations, and they had this big thick book on astrology that had all the triplicities and quadruplicities. Even though I avoid astrology, I thought it was interesting because of all those symmetries.
For the first time, I could understand why the somewhat popular funk group Earth, Wind & Fire omitted water. Lead singer Maurice White was a Sagittarius, and that sign is only under those three.
(I don't remember what that book was, but I remember it being white with blue and gold imagery).

But no, modern temperament theory is not based on that stuff. Not signs, not elements and of course, not humors. None of that stuff really determines personality, though they surmised that it did back then. It's just a measurement of expressive and responsiveness (loosely corresponding to hot/cold and moist/dry), and using the old names.

I would say that both NT and NF can be "fiery", as the quotes show. It's just the the NT will have a more critical goal-oriented motive behind it, while for the NF, it will ultimately be more altruistic in trying to help the human cause. It seem the former is really what the Choleric in its original conception was about, while the latter is tied more to the Phlegmatic's peace-loving diplomacy. (Or the unknown Supine's "service" to others). I would say NT is "dry", NF is "moist".

 

[tinkerbell]

LOL I'm not big on the moist dry etc, none of these things determine character they simply discribe it. The astrological planets don't even determin carachter, they describe the resources available to the individual to make with what they will.

Likely perhaps that the book you picked up MIGHT be Linda Goodman's Sun Signs. Not to be confused with star signs, which may blow your mind vis a vis the sheer leve of weirdness and cookie topics covered (includign a chapter on phisical imortality). If not that one, it could be 000 of other coffee table boos on the subject some of which are really dumbed down for the masses and actually produce wrong information.

Lots of these occultist subject fuse togeth with common theories, which also fuse together with higher level older religions like Kabalisim and Dulisim etc. Although I'm not up on either.

Phelgmatics are ultimately calm, deal well in a crisis.

The more one comapres these systems the more fudging you see with the more modern stuff. Intuition is a variable which would related to water, which acrossing to MBTI is shared with the NF, but I wonder if NF and NT's intuition works differently.

I once did a MBTI profile day with a team of 30 collegues, out of us all, there was only two NxP one F one T, we were asked to throw some thoughts on paper about the J types - ours was a largely scribbled bubble map of different things, there was a ranked list in beautiful handwiting etc.

As for Earth Wind and Fire, the missing element is always over compensated for in some way. I am a person with no air in my chart (so pretty heavy and lacking a real sense of casual), I over compensate my communications, in almost every way. I wonder how the said group over compensated for their lack of water.... hmmm interesting

 

[Eric B]

No, that wasn't the book. It was more like an encyclopedia of astrology or something.

The idea of compensating for the missing element is interesting, but then I don't believe in the elements (in their own right), and then the group had several members, and they may have been of water signs.